What I am learning as a low status male…

Okay, I try not to rant about personal shit, but didn’t some creepy male feminist say the personal is the political???

For no other reason than to trigger the libertarian tough guys…

I have been outta work for over a year now…

(and isn’t this where the mighty Clarence In Baltimore revisits the blog and says a subhuman such as myself shouldn’t even expect to be in the workforce because I am so low on his precious HBD scale as endorsed by that fraud Steve Sailer-yes, Clarence, it is spelled Sailer, not Sailor like Popeye…)

For 20 plus weeks I collected a nice ™ unemployment check.  I’m sure Barbarabroski and Ziggy Stardusk would raise their fists in rage.

I really liked the unstructured time and not having to wake up a a specific time.  I loved not having to answer to a boss.  I really loved having time to pursue hobbies.

I did have some savings to buy a replacement vehicle when the time came and these are greatly reduced…

I also realized I did not want to go back to my old “career.”

Yeah, if cold calling motherfuckers is a “career” I guess prostitutes and drug dealers are at a whole other level.  These self-actualized individuals are not hustling for another dollar but answering a spiritual calling.  But I digress…

That leads me to my new cahrear…

I am doing delivery.  No, not medical marijuana… (haha, maybe I should…)

I am working for a huge company, however I have about as many rights as an illegal immigrant.  Ironic how the CEO of “my” company is now the richest guy on the planet but the average worker of his makes maybe 25k per year.  Why “liberals” complain all day about Walmart but not this dude, I will never know…

Here’s the interesting part, or maybe shady part. I did not apply directly to “my” company.  I am at a third party company that, I guess, contracts to them.  Is this if there is an accident on the road, it is the third party company that gets sued and not the richest dude in the world?  Is it incase there is a wage claim that the third party company gets in trouble?  Enquiring minds wanna know.

Okay, first day (and only training day) was kinda fun.  Shadow an experienced driver.  Learn how to use the app.  Just know that when you call “support” the app is never wrong (even when it’s wrong) –It is user error, you stupid, little, little man!!!!

Get tips from other drivers including leaving vehicle on and sitting over seatbelt so you can get in/get out fast.  (And this goes against what is in the “official” training video.)  Did you know why post office trucks are like British vehicles with the driver on the right side?  Well, now I know.  Jumping outta the driver side and running to the other side or squeezing to get out the passenger side will slowly grind ya down.  Or, hehe, you could just park on the “wrong” side of the street.  Yeah, that was one of the better tips I got from veteran drivers.

Also, the app is a whole other thing… It will say that you have X stops but you really have Y stops because it will group multiple stops into one.  Maybe that is some serious libertarian tough guy stuff.  Or maybe I am too dumb to understand AI.  If I was of the more conspiratorial mindset, I’d wager that this was a secret hack from the richest guy in the world to squeeze out just a little more labor from his workforce w/o increasing pay… Y’know, tell ya, “Hey stud, you can’t complete 103 stops in 7 hours, what kinda man are ya?”  When you really did 147.  But alas, I am an agreeable fella and don’t think a rich, powerful dude would treat one of us little people as a fucking commodity.  I’m sure I just have to watch more Jordan Peterson and clean my nasty ass room!!!

Now the warehouse is where shit gets weird.  The “associates” cart around stuff like fast moving zombies.  There is a guy with a bullhorn telling you “safety first” and to do stretches.  One has gotta ask, did they get that outta the book 1984?  Being in the warehouse is the worst part of the job.  At least being in the field is kind of fun even if stressful.  The warehouse feels like some kind of jail.

Oh, well, not sure how long I am gonna last, but what the heck…

 

#mepoop

Okay, I’ve been reluctant to write anything about the #mepoop hastag because as everyone knows arguing with feminists is absolutely futile.  (Although making memes is good for a laugh and sometimes someone tells someone that the “source material” saw the meme I made and wound up highly offended.)

I’m also reluctant to write anything about when a man kills himself because everyone wants to erase whatever suffering he must’ve been going through and tag on their extraordinairily condescending political statement…

….however, look at this letter by the no talent hacks Rose McGowan and Asia Argento…

http://time.com/5308196/rose-mcgowan-anthony-bourdain-suicide-asia-argento/

“But here’s the thing, over their time together, thankfully, she did the work to get help, so she could stay alive and live another day for her and her children. Anthony’s depression didn’t let him, he put down his armor, and that was very much his choice. His decision, not hers. His depression won.”

Sounds allot like “pull yerself up by dem bootstraps, little man.  So I guess now feminists are eating from the same bowl of tough guy crap as those libertarians on MGTOW blogs…

“Anthony and Asia had a free relationship, they loved without borders of traditional relationships, and they established the parameters of their relationship early on. Asia is a free bird, and so was Anthony.”

Uh, is this the politically correct way to say they were “swingers?” Too bad, we can only ask on of ’em what the bounds of the relationshit were.  The other one mighta had a very different idea floating around in his head.

“We are asking you to be better, to look deeper, to read and learn about mental illness, suicide and depression before you make it worse for survivors by judging that which we do not understand, that which can never fully be understood.”

Is this double speak for ‘Absolve me of ALL responsibility.  Maybe I abused the dude, mocked his masculinity.  Demanded that he be a “perfect ally” but not have any of his needs on the table.  Remember, dudes are the predator class and us precious womyn the vyctym class.  Even when a dude up and kills himself, it is womyn who are the vycyms.  IT is alsways womyn who are the vyctyms.  Queen Hillary got it gosh darn right when she said womyn are the primary vyctyms of war.’

Somehow, this slop does not read like the words of a grieving lover.  More like the words of a slimy politician trying to evade responsibilty.  What was that phrase sanitized for tv so we wouldn’t question the bloodlust of the Whitehouse?  “Collateral Damage?”  Well, goddamnit and fuck, I guess this is just #2 in “Collateral Damage” for the #MePoop (bowel) movement…

If there is anything to be learned from this sad lose of life, I would say Don’t be an “Ally.”  Leave the door open when talking to women and even men these days so no false accusations can occur.  Be forthright and honest in all business dealings.  Have hard boundaries (ie “Do NOT mix business and pleasure because you are NOT James Bond Muthafucker!) Fight false accusations aggressively.  Do NOT trust liars and grifters.

An Irrefutable Intellectual Response to the “Clean Your Room” Trope…

Okay, quite frankly I am getting tired of speaking about Jordan Peterson…

However, I felt I needed to “tie up” loose ends so to speak…

I went on binge readings of Kant, Nietzsche, Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky to find source material to craft a rebuttal against Prof. Peterson…

I read tons and tons of psychological research in regards to conscientiousness and openness to experience to see where I could find flaws in Peterson’s logic…

I even read feminist intellectual criticism (is that a bigger contradiction in terms that “military intelligence?) -to see if I could find my answers…

I came up nada…

But while browsing Youtube, I found the irrefutable Intellectual Response to the “Clean Your Room” trope…

Is Jordan Peterson the New Hugo Schwyzer???

In my last article, I mentioned how Jordan Peterson’s use of “rhetoric” was similar to Hugo Schwyzer demolishing MRA’s in debates because he was more educated rather than right.  But the more I think about things, the more I see many similarities between fallen feminist icon Hugo Schwyzer and traditionalist tough guy Professor Peterson….

Of course there is the obvious stuff…

They are both academics and they are both fame seekers.  But let’s dive a little deeper…

Hugo Schwyzer often bashed low status men with what he called the trifecta: “Porn, Pot and Video Games.”  It was a cheap shot to ignore the very real struggles many men go through.  And why shouldn’t they “opt out” and enjoy themselves.  Feminism is supposed to be about helping women and not hurting men, right?

Okay, let’s take a look at Jordan Peterson and his views on Universal Basic Income:

Most telling is his attitude in the video, “Men who are men don’t need money, they need function…”

…and interestingly enough, he made fun of MGTOW’s, men who discuss “the game being rigged.”  Is it because he needs low status men to “stay in the game?” Neither Schwyzer nor Peterson have much “status” if being a professor means nothing and other men aren’t broke.  Both have “succeeded” in a dominance hierarchy and need struggling men beneath them.  If men “opt out” then what do they have?  A worthless piece of paper and a finger to wag, “Stop being lazy and be of service to women?”


The next point will be a bit counterintuitive, but I believe we can look at Schwyzer and Peterson as being “different sides” of the same coin…

At first glance a (neo) liberal male feminist and a “right wing” trad con would seem diametrically opposed.

Schwyzer was a sex positive male feminist who brought adult film stars with allegations of abuse to his classes.

Peterson seems almost regressive to many right wingers for questioning women’s wearing make-up in the workplace. And he has also talked about women’s (increasing) unhapiness and the “problem” high powered women have of finding a man as well heeled or better off, so to speak.

Now, I may be making a jump in logic, but I think at the root of both ideologies is a desire to control people.  In Schwyzer’s case, he wants to shame low status men.  In Peterson’s case he wants to curtail women’s freedoms and lecture men to “return to patriarchy.” Both of them are at odds with male sovereignty at the end of the day. They just have different ideas of how to do this.


The third point is the “impropriety” of both of these guys…

(Now in Peterson’s case it is merely accusations…)

(Thanks to Mr. Odessa for letting me know at AD’s place…)

Now, what I find strange about this is that Prof. Peterson is reluctant to leave the door open when speaking to female students.  I remember when I worked in a public facing role that I made sure to be as out in the open as possible so that I wouldn’t face a false accusation.  I was glad to have “camera’s on the cash registers” so to speak.  I did, ironically enough, face one issue of being accused of being stoned at work.  And, this was a time in my life I probably would’ve passed a piss test.

Part of me can appreciate that Peterson doesn’t want to give up all privacy when conversing with a student and it seems like giving the finger to the NSA.  However, one might think that if they were absolutely baseless accusations, he would now happily leave the door open to avoid them in the future.  So for me, something doesn’t seem to be adding up.

Schwyzer bragged about banging students on his desk and even had a post on his blog about how  he almost killed his lover (and himself) in a drug fueled rage…

Ironically, Peterson talks about “having your house in order” before you critique the world.  But neither of these two asshats have any problem wagging their finger at low status men.  What a bunch of sanctimonious pricks…


Update, the Youtube video where JP says he has been accused of sexual misconduct 3 times has “gone down the memory hole.”

If any of you guys have a link to a mirror video, feel free to drop it in the comments…

 

On Jordan Peterson: The Strange Case of the New False Prophet

First off, I know how pretentious it is to start a title with “On.” But when the subject matter is Prof Peterson, it seems appropriate…

Secondly, I do not believe that he is a Nazi or a facist.  Let me repeat that, I DO NOT believe JP is a Nazi or Facist.  In case you weren’t listening, I DO NOT believe he is a Nazi or a facist…

Thirdly, since most of my exposure to him has been Youtube, this would turn into an extraordinairily dense thing if I tried to cite everyting, so this might be a bit sloppy.  Commenters, feel free to drop videos or appropriate articles in the comments….

Okay, with that outta the way, let’s begin…

I stumbled onto JP when some Miggytoes whined that “public intellectual” Jordan Peterson had “slandered us.”  I stumbled on to Joe “Where’s the beef, I’m mean Roids” Rogan when I saw part of an interview he did with Metallica’s singer.  I later watched Roid breath’s interview with JP.  JP was extraordinairly well spoken.  He was like a great salesman who practiced rebutals to every objection he could think of.  When he couldn’t think of a rebutal, he kept talking anyways and his words were so polished they seemed like truth.  He seemed like a guy on a whole other level.  I believe that he had studied “rhetoric” as he studied philosophy.  Now, remember, just a little while back, we saw the overly educated and pompous Hugo Schwyzer talk over MRA’s and attempt to demolish their points because they missued an apostrophe all while the Skeezer was using “feminism” to get laid and bash low status men.  So, even if a Peterson critic “speaks the truth,” his sophistry is most likely far more developed and might appear to be more accurate because it sounds better…

Now, it appears that Jordan Peterson was trying to attain fame for a few years now.  He had mentioned “an interest in politics.”  He had gone on public televsion with his daughter discussing her dietary issues and his depression.  And, he had begun filming his lectures and uploading to Youtube.  Let me spell this out for you.  The reason why this is relevant is that he wasn’t an obscure academic who merely wanted to do research and lecture and now felt compelled to issue dire warnings because he though Bill C 16was going to lead us to a dark age where SJW’s with rainbow colored battons and pink swastika’s walk goose step and throw people into Siberian Gulags because they accidently said there were only 98 genders instead of 173.965.  Does Jordan Peterson believe we are entering a dark ages in regards for free speech and feel moraly compelled to  steer Western Civilization way from this odius fate? Is Peterson shrewed and saavy and have his finger on the pulse of Western Culture?  Did he observe Bre-exit and Trumpism and realize that he “now had a product” to sell?  I am not a mind reader.  I do not know what he is thinking and even acknowledge the possibility that he is doing this on a subconcious level and he himself may not know exactly what he is thinking.  (Though his training should make him more self-aware than most.)

Jordan Peterson’s most damning critique comes from a friend and colleque who helped build his academic career:

“Jordan’s first high-profile public battle, and for many people their introduction to the man, followed his declaration that he would not comply with Bill C-16, an amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act extending its protections to include gender identity and expression. He would refuse to refer to students using gender neutral pronouns. He then upped the stakes by claiming that, for this transgression, he could be sent to jail.

I have a trans daughter, but that was hardly an issue compared to what I felt was a betrayal of my trust and confidence in him. It was an abuse of the trust that comes with his professorial position, which I had fought for, to have misrepresented gender science by dismissing the evidence that the relationship of gender to biology is not absolute and to have made the claim that he could be jailed when, at worst, he could be fined.

In his defence, Jordan told me if he refused to pay the fine he could go to jail. That is not the same as being jailed for what you say, but it did ennoble him as a would-be martyr in the defence of free speech. He was a true free speech “warrior” who was willing to sacrifice and run roughshod over his students to make a point. He could have spared his students and chosen to sidestep the issue and refer to them by their names. And if this was truly a matter of free speech he could have challenged the Human Rights Act, off-campus and much earlier, by openly using language offensive to any of the already-protected groups on that list.”

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-petersons-strongest-supporter-now-i-think-hes-dangerous.html

In this same article, there may be “ethical concerns” on how JP conducted research studies.  Now listen, I get it, no one likes red-tape.  I remember working in a sales organization where I was initially told to “bring in deals.”  As the company grew there was a “management layer” that didn’t do things to help close deals and also pressure to work with outside resellers rather than selling direct to organizations.  All of this meant (far) more work for significantly lower commissions.  I remember coming accross Youtube video where JP discussed giving full grown men copius amounts of alcohol to measure how the sons of alcoholic fathers reacted.  He mentioned having difficulty with the research as he was told that he had to keep the research subjects the entire time while they were intoxicated and some became belligerent.  Imagine that, I didn’t need a psycology degree to tell ya that might happen.  I think he mentioned the study was eventually shut down.  But of course there could be liability issues deary.  Can you imagine sending drunk guys out into the wild so to speak?  They might get in a fight with their roomate or spouse.  They might even get jumped as they stumble home.  On another note, experiments that were conducted many years ago such as the Millgram experiment couldn’t be ethically conducted these days.

Again from the same article:

“He was, however, more eccentric than I had expected. He was a maverick. Even though there was nothing contentious about his research, he objected in principle to having it reviewed by the university research ethics committee, whose purpose is to protect the safety and well-being of experiment subjects.

He requested a meeting with the committee. I was not present but was told that he had questioned the authority and expertise of the committee members, had insisted that he alone was in a position to judge whether his research was ethical and that, in any case, he was fully capable of making such decisions himself. He was impervious to the fact that subjects in psychological research had been, on occasion, subjected to bad experiences, and also to the fact that both the Canadian and United States governments had made these reviews mandatory. What was he doing! I managed to make light of this to myself by attributing it to his unbridled energy and fierce independence, which were, in many other ways, virtues. That was a mistake.”

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-petersons-strongest-supporter-now-i-think-hes-dangerous.html

Now to be fair, I don’t know if this was on his research for alcohol or another set of studies.  And again, I can understand how he wouldn’t like red-tape.  But, his “bucking the system” may be a lapse in ethics.

In my opinion, he talks over people but listens carefully.  How is this so? Remember his interview with James Damore? In my opinion, he talked over Damore and even twisted Damore’s arm to fit his agenda.  I do not have a wholesale agreement with Damore, but it looks to me that he has been used as a puppet by many on the “right.”

Now as far as “listening carefully,” this may be the most daming thing I say about Peterson and also the most difficult to prove.  I believe he carefully reads the comments on his Youtube video. And as he has said of facist leaders, he crafts his messages on which brings the most response from his audience.  (Again, I am not claiming he is a nazi but I believe he is “listening to the applause” of his audience to feed them more of what they crave.)

He also rambles on about “dominance hierarchies” and seems to suggest that not only are they natural but also produce great outcomes because the “cream rises to the top.” He was on the Jock Willnick podcast awhile back and interstingly enough on another Jocko podcast, Jocko talked about rising in rank in the military, a very hierarchical organization.
Jocko said guys would see him “go after it/get on it” aggressively but what they didn’t see was the political schmoozing.  That is going to lunch with the commanding officer, saying the right things and “massaging” him for a promotion.  Jocko, in my mind, acknowledged that this was highly political rather than a meritocracy.    Imagine if one of his fan boys works hard in school and tries to become a professor.  But he falls short of the tenure track and starves as an adjunct professor (linked to Jezebel of all places because hipster irony y’all.) He seems to dismiss sometimes legitimate critiques of dominance hierarchies because they come from “the left.”  (And remember, guys, he is a winner as a tenured professor in this system.)

Now this brings us to the famous “clean your room” trope.  Now granted, when I did my spring cleaning, I was happy to find a few concert t-shirts that I thought were forever lost and a Thin Lizzy DVD.  This seems like sensible advice the way that the manuresphere’s advice to lift weights seems sensible.  Nothing wrong with cleaning your room and organizing your life.  However, noted geniuses such as Albert Einstein were known to be messy.  It seems like  JP is prioritizing “orderliness” and “concientiousness” above traits like creativity and openess to experience.  And look at complaints from the right and alt-right that things like movies, art and music are “controlled” by the left.  Well, when you have guys like Captain Capitalism shouting that real men “get STEM degree’s” and art and music is “sissy, faggot” shit, your movement has essentially pushed those guys outta your camp.  They are gonna go to the left or they are gonna ignore you guys.  The manosphere essentially pushed out the creative class and it looks like JP and his fanboys might do the same.